Look at the Pardoner: the Genius of Chaucer

The Canterbury Tales is a literary masterpiece in which the brilliant author Geoffrey
Chaucer sought out to accomplish various goals. Chaucer wrote his tales during the late
1300?s. This puts him right at the beginning of the decline of the Middle Ages. Historically,
we know that a middle class was just starting to take shape at this time, due to the
emerging commerce industry. Chaucer was able to see the importance and future success
of the middle class, and wrote his work with them in mind. Knowing that the middle class
was not interested in lofty philosophical literature, Chaucer wrote his work as an extremely
comical and entertaining piece that would be more interesting to his audience. Also,
Chaucer tried to reach the middle class by writing The Canterbury Tales in English, the
language of the middle class rather than French, the language of the educated upper
class. The most impressive aspect of Chaucer?s writing is how he incorporated into his
piece some of his own controversial views of society, but yet kept it very entertaining and
light on the surface level. One of the most prevalent of these ideas was his view that
certain aspects of the church had become corrupt. This idea sharply contrasted previous
Middle Age thought, which excepted the church?s absolute power and goodness
unquestionably. He used corrupt church officials in his tales to illustrate to his audience
that certain aspects of the church needed to be reformed. The most intriguing of these
characters was the Pardoner. Chaucer?s satirical account of the Pardoner is written in a
very matter-of-fact manner that made it even more unsettling with his audience. Chaucer
uses his straightforwardness regarding the hypocrisy of the Pardoner, suggestive
physiognomy of the character, and an interesting scene at the conclusion of the Pardoner?
s Tale to inculcate his views of the church to his audience. The way that Chaucer used
these literary devices to subtly make his views known to an audience while hooking them
with entertainment, shows that Chaucer was truly a literary genius.
The first of these devices, his straightforwardness and matter-of-factness regarding the
Pardoner?s hypocrisy, is used first to appall his readers, and then to cause them to take a
second look at the church in their own society. Chaucer knew that most of his audience
lacked the ability to fully understand his views, but he hoped that by using this device he
could plant seeds of reason in them that would lead to reform of corruption he saw among
church officials like the pardoners. The role of a pardoner in the Medieval Church was to
sell indulgences, which granted the buyer pardon for their sins. John Manly, in his book
Some New Light on Chaucer, believed that Chaucer developed his negative attitude
towards this practice by observing the pardoners of the city Rouncival (127). These
pardoners in particular had developed a reputation of being scandalous and full of avarice
during the late 1300?s. Chaucer saw this practice of selling indulgences as obviously
corrupt, so he therefore sought to make his Pardoner obviously corrupt to his readers.

The Pardoner is very open about his hypocrisy and does not show any sign of remorse for
it. In preaching to his audiences his theme is always ?Radix malorum est cupiditas?
(Chaucer 1672), which means, greed is the root of all evil. However, he then proudly
admits, ?Avarice is the theme that I employ in all my sermons, to make the people free in
giving pennies-especially to me. My mind is fixed on what I stand to win and not at all upon
correcting sin.? and also boast, ?By such hornswoggling I?ve won, year by year, a hundred
marks? (1673). The simple fact that a person with such an evil heart, so full of greed, could
be successful at accomplishing a duty of the church, makes evident the fact that there must
be something morally wrong with that duty itself. Also, the fact that the Pardoner so openly
admits his corrupt actions causes the reader to question whether this is not common
practice among pardoners.
The second way that Chaucer ingeniously attributed corruption to his Pardoner was though
physiognomy. In Chaucer?s time there was a well-known science of ?interpreting a man?s
character from a study of his features?(Duino 322). Certain stereotypes concerning
physical features were understood by all people of his time, so Chaucer used these
stereotypes as symbolism in his work. The following passage from the general prologue
illustrates this well:
This Pardoner had hair as yellow as wax?and let the ends about his shoulders spread in
thin clusters?and in his eyes he glittered like a hair?
[and] had a voice like a goat?s bleat. He was beardless and would never have a beard?I
think he was a gelding or a mare. (Chaucer 1626-1627)
Chaucer loaded this passage with physiognomy to let his readers know what type of man
this pardoner was. First, the long thin yellow hair and high-pitched voice were symbols of a
lack of manhood (Duino 322). Second, the wide glittering eyes were a symbol of
shamelessness and pride. Thirdly, the fact that he had no facial hair not only was a symbol
of a lack of manhood, but was also a symbol of sly cleverness (323). The last line of this
passage is probably the most intriguing of them all. It suggests that the pardoner was a
eunuch (someone who has either had his genitals removed).
By making the Pardoner a eunuch, Chaucer accomplished his goal of writing with deeper
meaning and symbolism while maintaining an entertaining work one again. The effect of
this on his audience was one of disgust and intrigue, but Chaucer had other intentions that
stemmed from Biblical text. The Bible mentions two types of eunuchs: those who became
eunuchs for spiritual reasons, and those who became eunuchs unspiritual reasons. The
first type of eunuch sought to cut themselves off from worldly desires. If a member of the
church was to be a eunuch, this was the only acceptable type. In fact Deuteronomy 23:1
condemns unspiritual eunuchs by commanding, ?No on who had been emasculated by
crushing or cutting may enter the assembly of God? (Santa Biblia 247). However, the
audience knows that the Pardoner is not a spiritual man, so it certainly was not for spiritual

reasons. It can be assumed, however, that the Pardoner cut off his genitals because he
was a very distorted individual who secretly wished to be a female. In attempt to keep this
a secret, the Pardoner interrupts the Wife of Bath?s prologue to announce that he desires
to have a wench in every town (Helterman 2). Later the reader realizes this was simply a
cover up when the Pardoner sings a ?song of carnal, rather than spiritual, love? to the
Summoner (Miller 182). To Chaucer this was the ultimate of hypocrisies. A eunuch who
was, according to the Old Testament, not even supposed to be allowed in church, he made
a leader of the church. Also, a spiritual eunuch chooses to cut himself off from temporal
desires, but Chaucer?s Pardoner choose to cut himself off from spiritual desires. These
underlying messages of hypocrisy give the educated reader an idea of Chaucer?s personal
views of some of the pardoner?s in the church. Also, the manner in which Chaucer used
both obvious character flaws of the Pardoner, and deeper hypocrisies of his nature, show
the depth and genius of his writing.
Another passage in The Canterbury Tales that invites interpretation and shows more
obviously Chaucer?s complexity, is at the conclusion of ?The Pardoner?s Tale.? The
Pardoner told a type of tale to the other pilgrims that he was very accustomed to telling. It
was a tale that taught the moral, ?radix malorum est cupiditas? (Chaucer 1674). The
Pardoner had previously admitted to the other pilgrims his manipulative method of selling
worthless relics and pardons. However, at the conclusion of his tale he tries to use that
exact method to sell his worthless goods to the pilgrims. There is also a very interesting
confrontation between the Pardoner and the Host. The Pardoner singles out the Host and
tries to sell him his pardons, but the Host refuses and verbally attacks the Pardoner. To this
attack the ?Pardoner did not answer; not a word, he was so angry, could he find to say?
(Chaucer 1685). This is one passage in which entertainment is not necessarily the obvious
goal. Chaucer knew that this passage would not be easily understood by the middle class,
but hoped it would spur deeper thought in them. In fact, scholars have not been able to
agree on its purpose, and have come up with made many different interpretations. The
most uncommon of these was by Professor George Kittredge of Harvard University. He
believed that this was actually a moment of true sincerity by the Pardoner, and he was
genuinely concerned about the well being of the other pilgrims? spirits when he tried to sell
them the pardons (Duino 322). Others believe that the goal of the Pardoner was the
ultimate sell. If he could tell the pilgrims his method of selling first, and still successfully pull
off the sell, it would have been ?the crowning success of his career? as a seller of pardons
(Duino 323). I believe, however, that Chaucer was just showing how accustomed the
Pardoner was with using this tale in his sales pitch. At the immediate conclusion of his tale
the Pardoner announces, ?And now, good men, your sins may God forgive and keep you
specially from avarice!? (Chaucer 1684). Since the Pardoner naturally and skillfully goes
right into this sales pitch, it is evident that he was simply reciting a memorized sermon.

Also, the fact that the pardoner recites this pitch with such enthusiasm, shows that this
manipulation was something he was very experienced in, and rather enjoyed doing. When
the Host refused to buy the relics and then preceded to insult the Pardoner because of his
hypocrisy, the Pardoner realized that he had gone right into his sales pitch without even
thinking. Unlike most of The Canterbury Tales, this passage demands interpretation even
at the surface level. However, the one obvious point Chaucer sought to make in this
passage, was how important the pilgrims? knowledge of the Pardoner?s hypocrisy was.
Because of their knowledge of his hypocrisy, the pilgrims were able to refrain from buying
into the Pardoner?s con which would surely have brought them ?Christ?s curse? (Chaucer
1685). This importance of knowledge, and especially the awareness of the corruption of
certain church practices, was what he hoped to instill in all of his readers.
Chaucer?s genius as a writer has never been denied. By stealthily incorporating his
controversial views of the church, while still being able to make his tales entertaining to all
people, Chaucer succeeded in writing a literary masterpiece. At the decline of the middle
ages, Chaucer was seeking to promote rational thought, especially among the middle
class. He hoped to do this by showing the obvious hypocrisy of those who sold
indulgences and by showing how important awareness of hypocrisy is. He did this with the
literary devices of straight-forwardness and physiognomy, as well as the events that took
place at the conclusion of ?The Pardoner?s Tale.? Breaking through the surface value of
this entertaining piece into the more complex aspects of Chaucer?s writings also gives
credit to his greatness. However, it was the way in which Chaucer sought to raise
questions concerning the church?s practices, almost as propaganda, that Chaucer showed
himself to be a writer ahead of his time.